Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
251
Abstract
In the context of prevalence of high concentrations of arsenic in tubewell water,
a wide range technologies has been tried for the removal of arsenic from
drinking water. The most common technologies utilized the conventional
processes of oxidation, co-precipitation and adsorption onto coagulated flocs,
adsorption onto sorptive media, ion exchange and membrane techniques for
arsenic removal. The conventional technologies have been scaled down to meet
the requirements of households and communities and suit the rural environment.
Some technologies utilized indigenous materials for arsenic removal. This paper
presents a short review of the technologies used for arsenic removal in
Bangladesh and India.
INTRODUCTION
Groundwater is available in shallow aquifers in adequate quantity in the flood
plains for development tubewell based water supply for scattered rural
population.
Bangladesh and West Bengal in India achieved remarkable
successes by providing drinking water at low-cost to the rural population through
sinking of shallow tubewells in flood plain aquifers. Unfortunately arsenic
contamination of shallow tubewell water in excess of acceptable limit has
become a major public health problem in both the countries. Thousands of
people have already shown the symptoms of arsenic poisoning and several
252
253
OXIDATION
Arsenic is present in groundwater in As(III) and As(V) forms in different
proportions. Most treatment methods are effective in removing arsenic in
pentavalent form and hence include an oxidation step as preteatment to convert
arsenite to arsenate. Arsenite can be oxidized by oxygen, ozone, free chlorine,
hypochlorite, permanganate, hydrogen peroxide and fulton's reagent but
Atmospheric oxygen, hypochloride and permanganate are commonly used for
oxidation in developing countries:
H3AsO3 + O2
= H2AsO4- + 2 H +
H3AsO3 + HClO = HAsO4-- + Cl - + 3H+
3H3AsO3 + 2KMnO4 = 3HAsO4- - + 2MnO2+ + 2K+ + 4H+ + H2O
(1)
(2)
(3)
Air oxidation of arsenic is very slow and can take weeks for oxidation
(Pierce and Moore, 1982) but chemicals like chlorine and permanganate can
rapidly oxidize arsenite to arsenate under wide range of conditions.
Passive Sedimentation
Passive sedimentation received considerable attention because of rural people's
habit of drinking stored water from pitchers. Oxidation of water during collection
and subsequent storage in houses may cause a reduction in arsenic concentration
in stored water (Bashi Pani). Experiments conducted in Bangladesh showed zero
to high reduction in arsenic content by passive sedimentation. Arsenic reduction
by plain sedimentation appears to be dependent on water quality particularly the
presence of precipitating iron in water. Ahmed et al.(2000) showed that more
than 50% reduction in arsenic content is possible by sedimentation of tubewell
water containing 380-480 mg/L of alkalinity as CaCO3 and 8-12 mg/L of iron but
cannot be relied to reduce arsenic to desired level. Most studies showed a
reduction of zero to 25% of the initial concentration of arsenic in groundwater. In
rapid assessment of technologies passive sedimentation failed to reduce arsenic
to the desired level of 50 g/L in any well(BAMWSP, DFID, WaterAid , 2001).
In-situ Oxidation
In-situ oxidation of arsenic and iron in the aquifer has been tried under DPHEDanida Arsenic Mitigation Pilot Project. The aerated tubewell water is stored in
a tank and released back into the aquifers through the tubewell by opening a
valve in a pipe connecting the water tank to the tubewell pipe under the pump
head. The dissolved oxygen in water oxidizes arsenite to less mobile arsenate and
also the ferrous iron in the aquifer to ferric iron, resulting a reduction in arsenic
content in tubewell water. The possible reactions of arsenate to ferric hydroxide
are shown in Equations 7 to 8. Experimental results show that arsenic in the
254
(4)
Aluminium precipitation(acidic):
2Al+++ + 6H2O = 2Al(OH)3 + 6H+
(5)
(6)
255
(7)
(8)
(9)
256
Chemicals
Mixing
stick
Transfer of chemical
mixed water
Main bucket
Interior bucket
Slits
Outlet with
cloth filter
Filter
sand
Plastic pipe to
deliver treated
water
257
Gear system
Cover
Impeller
Tank
Sludge
withdrawal
pipe
Handle
Filtration
unit
Treated
water
258
D
C
259
100
Arsenic Removal ,%
90
y = 0.8718x + 0.4547
R2 = 0.6911
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Iron Removal , %
260
These plants are working well except that treated water requirement for washing
the filter beds is very high. Operations of small and medium size IRP-cum-ARPs
in Bangladesh suggest that arsenic removal by co-precipitation and adsorption on
natural iron flocs has good potential.
Chemical Packages
In Bangladesh, different types of chemical packages have been distributed in the
form of tea bags, small packets and powder or tablet form for the removal of
arsenic from drinking water. The principles involved in arsenic removal by these
chemicals involve oxidation, sorption and co-precipitation. Application
methodology and efficiency of any of these chemicals have not been fully
optimized by long experimentation. Quality assurance and dose control in rural
condition are extremely difficult. The residuals of added chemicals in water after
treatment can do equal harm. The use of unknown chemicals and patented
process without adequate information should be totally discouraged.
261
262
263
iron in groundwater could be the reason for arsenic removal from groundwater.
The unit produced inadequate quantity of water and did not show reliable results
in different areas of Bangladesh and under different operating conditions. The
Chari filter also uses brick chips and inert aggregates in different Charis as filter
media. The effectiveness of this filter in arsenic removal is not known.
The Shafi and Adarsh filters use clay material as filter media in the form of
candle. The Shafi filter was reported to have good arsenic removal capacity but
suffered from clogging of filter media. The Adarsha filter participated in the
rapid assessment program but failed to meet the technical criterion of reducing
arsenic to acceptable level (BAMWSP, DFID and WaterAid, 2000). Bijoypur
clay and treated cellulose were also found to adsorb arsenic from water (Khair,
2000).
Cartridge Filters
Filter units with cartridges filled with soptive media or ion-exchange resins are
readily available in the market. These unit remove arsenic like any other
dissolved ions present in water. These units are not suitable for water having high
impurities and iron in water. Presence of ions having higher affinity than arsenic
can quickly saturate the media requiring regeneration or replacement. Two
household filters were tested at BUET laboratories, These are:
Chiyoda Arsenic Removal Unit, Japan
Coolmart Water Purifier, Korea.
The Chiyoda Arsenic Removal Unit could treat 800 BV meeting the WHO
guideline value of 10 g/L and 1300 BV meeting the Bangladesh Standard of 50
g/L when the feed water arsenic concentration was 300 g/L. The Coolmart
Water Purifier could treat only 20 L of water with a effluent arsenic content of 25
g/L ( Ahmed et al., 2000). The initial and operation costs of these units are high
and beyond the reach of the rural people.
ION EXCHANGE
The process is similar to that of activated alumina, just the medium is a synthetic
resin of more well defined ion exchange capacity. The process is normally used
for removal of specific undesirable cation or anion from water. As the resin
becomes exhausted, it needs to be regenerated. The arsenic exchange and
regeneration equations with common salt solution as regeneration agent are as
follows:
Arsenic exchange
2R-Cl
HAsO4-- =
R2HAsO4 + 2Cl-
(10)
264
Regeneration
R2HAsO4 + 2N+ + 2Cl- = 2R-Cl + HAsO4-- + 2Na+
(11)
MEMBRANE TECHNIQUES
Membrane techniques like reverse osmosis, nanofiltration and electrodialysis are
capable of removing all kinds of dissolved solids including arsenic from water.
In this process water is allowed to pass through special filter media which
physically retain the impurities present in water. The water, for treatment by
membrane techniques, shall be free from suspended solids and the arsenic in
water shall be in pentavalent form. Most membranes, however, can not withstand
oxidizing agent.
MRT-1000 and Reid System Ltd.
Jago Corporation Limited promoted a household reverse osmosis water dispenser
MRT-1000 manufactured by B & T Science Co. Limited, Taiwan. This system
was tested at BUET and showed a arsenic (III) removal efficiency more than
80%. A wider spectrum reverse osmosis system named Reid System Limited was
also promoted in Bangladesh. Experimental results showed that the system could
effectively reduce arsenic content along with other impurities in water. The
capital and operational costs of the reverse osmosis system would be relatively
high.
265
DISCUSSIONS
A remarkable technological development in arsenic removal from rural water
supply based on conventional arsenic removal processes has been taken place
during last 2-3 years. A comparison of different arsenic removal processes is
shown in Table 1.
All the technologies described in this paper have their merits and demerits
and are being refined to make suitable in rural condition. The modifications
based on the pilot-scale implementation of the technologies are in progress with
the objectives to:
improve effectiveness in arsenic removal
reduce the capital and operation cost of the systems
make the technology user friendly
overcome maintenance problems
resolve sludge and arsenic concentrates management problems.
Arsenic removal technologies have to compete with other technologies in
which cost appears to a major determinant in the selection of a treatment option
by the users. The rural people habituated in drinking tubewell water may find
arsenic removal from tubewell water as a suitable option for water supply. In
many arsenic affected areas, arsenic removal may be the only option in the
absence of an alternative safe source of water supply.
266
Advantages
Disadvantages
Oxidation/
Precipitation
Air Oxidation
Chemical
oxidation
Coagulation
Coprecipitation :
Alum
Coagulation
Iron Coagulation
Sorption Techniques
Actvated
Alumina
Ion Exchange
Resin
Other Sorbents
Membrane
Techniques
Nanofiltration
Reverse osmosis
Electrodialysis
267
CONCLUSION
The technologies found effective and safe for arsenic removal from tubewell
water need promotion for wider implementation in the acute arsenic problem
areas to avoid ingestion of excessive arsenic through tubewell water. The arsenic
removal technologies are expected to improve further through adaptation in rural
environment.
REFERENCES
Ahmed M.F and Rahaman M. M.(2000), Water Supply and Sanitation - Low
Income Urban Communities, International Training Network (ITN) Centre,
BUET.
Ahmed. F. , Jalil, M.A., Ali, M.A., Hossain, M.D. and Badruzzaman, A.B.M. An
overview of arsenic removal technologies in BUET, In Bangladesh
Environment-2000, M.F.Ahmed (Ed.), Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon, 177188.
BAMWSP, DFID and WaterAid Bangladesh ( 2001), Rapid Assessment of
Household Level Arsenic Removal Technologies, Phase-! and Phase-II, Final
Report, WS Atkins International Limited.
Chen, H.W., Frey, M.M., Clifford, D., McNeill, L.S. and Edwards, M., 1999,
Arsenic treatment considerations, Journal of American Water Works
Association, 91(3), 74-85.
Cheng, C. R., Liang, S. Wang, H. C. and Beuhler, M. D. (1994), "Enhanced
coagulation for arsenic removal", J. American Water Works Association,
86(9), p.79-90.
268
Dahi, E and Liang, Q. ( 1998), Arsenic Removal in Hand Pump Connected Iron
Removal Plants in Noakhali, Bangladesh presented at International
Conference on Arsenic Pollution of Ground Water in Bangladesh : Causes,
Effect and Remedies, Dhaka, 8-12 February.
Hering, J. G., Chen, P. Y., Wilkie, J. A., Elimelech, M. and Liang, S. (1996),
Arsenic removal by ferric chloride, J. American Water Works Association,
88(4), p.155-167.
Hering, J. G., Chen, P., Wilkie, J. A., Elimelech, M. (1997), Arsenic removal
from drinking water during coagulation, J. Env. Eng., ASCE, 123(8), p.800807.
Jekel, M.R., 1994, Removal of arsenic in drinking water treatment. In J.O.
Nriagu (Ed.) Arsenic in the Environment, Part 1: Cycling and
Characterization, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Joshi, A. and Chaudhury, M. (1996), Removal of arsenic from groundwater by
iron-oxide-coated sand, ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering,
122(8), p.769-771.
Kartinen, E. O. and Martin, C. J. (1995), An overview of arsenic removal processes, J.
Desalination, 103, p.79-88.
269
Oh, J.I., K., Urase, T., Kitawaki, H., Rahaman, M.M., Rahaman, M.H. and
Yamamoto, K., Modelling of arsenic rejection considering affinity and steric
hindrance effect in nonofiltration membranes, Water Science and
Technology, 42, 3-4 : 173-180.
Pierce, M.L. and Moore, C.B. (1982), Adsorption of Arsenite and Arsenate on
amorphous iron hydroxide, Water Resources, 16, 1247-1253.
Pontius, F.W.(Ed.),1990, Water Quality Treatment: a handbook of community
water supplies, American Water Works Association, McGraw-Hill, New
York.
Sorg, T.J. and Logsdon, G.S. 1974, Treatment technology to meet the interim
primary drinking water regulations for inorganics: Part 2, Journal of the
American Water Works Association, 70(7), 379-393).
Shen, Y. S. (1973), Study of arsenic removal from drinking water", J. American
Water Works Association, 65(8), p.543-548.
Shin Nihon Salt Co. Ltd. (2000), Report on Performance of Read-F Arsenic
Removal Unit (ARU), October.
Sarkar, A, Thogersen, Choudhury, Rahaman, Akhter and Choudhury (2000),
Bucket Treatment unit for arsenic removal, In Water, Sanitation and
Hygiene: Challenges of the Millennium, Pre-prints of the 26 WEDC
Conference, Dhaka, Bangladesh., 308-310.
Wegelin, M., Gechter, D., Hug, S., Mahmud, A., Motaleb, A. (2000) SORAS-a
simple arsenic removal process (http://phys4.harvard.edu/wilson
/mitigation/SORAS_ Paper.html).
Young, E (1996), Cleaning up arsenic and old waste, New Scientist, 14 December
: 22.